Deeper Commentary
Dan 9:1 In the first year of Darius the son of Ahasuerus, of the seed
of the Medes, who was made king over the realm of the Chaldeans- The
end of the Babylonian domination of Judah spurred Daniel to study and pray
for the restoration of the kingdom of God in the form of Judah. He had seen
the first part of the image and beast prophecies come true, at least in its
historical form. He obviously thought that in some sense, the "end" could
come- if there was sufficient repentance. And his prayer of repentance was
an attempt to demonstrate that. He didn't merely resign himself to there
having to be a further sequence of kings and kingdoms dominating the land
before the end came. He was open to the idea of God's flexibility and
ability to change a predicted set of events, in line with human repentance
and spirituality. Or perhaps he understood the image as standing complete
under the headship of Babylon, and now being ready for destruction by the
little stone, seeing that the Babylonian headship had now been removed.
Dan 9:2 In the first year of his reign I Daniel understood by the books-
Not by vision and direct revelation, but by his own studies. Hence his
deep disappointment when he received the visions of Dan. 7 and 8 about how
the end was not going to be after the 70 years of Jeremiah's prophecy, but
there had been delays incorporated into the Divine program because of
Judah's sin and refusal to fully repent. The record of this prayer is in the
past tense (:4). It could be that after realizing at the end of Dan. 8 that
things were not going to work out as had been potentially possible, Daniel
recalls this previous prayer of his, and recognizes that it has not been
answered as he had wished; it would be answered, but not within the time
frame he had expected. And so was fulfilled Ez. 14:14, which had stated that
even Daniel could not avert the calamity to befall Judah.
It could be argued that in fact Daniel misunderstood. He was calculating 70 years from the first deportations from Judah, which he had been part of. But a fair case can be made that those 70 years should have been calculated from the destruction of the temple. Yet still God responds to Daniel's prayer and misunderstanding, doesn't point out where he had miscalculated, and instead responds by refocusing Daniel upon the final ultimate fulfilment of the restoration after the 70 weeks leading to Messiah's Kingdom.
The number of the years about which the word of Yahweh had come to
Jeremiah the prophet for the accomplishing of the desolations of
Jerusalem, even seventy years- God
has intentions that He has placed in history. But this doesn't mean that
man is predetermined beyond his freewill. Always there is a flexible
element in prophecies, to allow for the human response element.
Daniel understood that after 70 years Jerusalem must be restored; but
he earnestly prayed for their forgiveness
so that this would happen
(Dan. 9:2 cp. 19). Perhaps he opened his window and prayed towards Jerusalem
exactly because he wanted to fulfil 2 Chron. 6:37,38: “If they shall bethink
themselves in the land whither they are carried captive, and turn, and pray
unto thee… toward their land… and toward the city which thou hast chosen”. He
knew that repentance was a precondition for the promised restoration to
occur.
In the context of the returning exiles, Daniel was aware that the 70
years of desolation had to be fulfilled, and yet he asks God not to defer
the promised restoration (Dan. 9:2 cp. 19), as if he understood that the
predicted revival of Israel could still be delayed by God on account of
their unpreparedness, even though it was prophesied. Daniel understood
from Jeremiah’s prophecies that Jerusalem’s fortunes would be revived
after the 70 year period was ended. Yet he goes on to ask God to
immediately forgive His people, as if Daniel even dared hope that the
period might be shortened. Daniel lived into the reign of Cyrus (Dan.
6:28), and so he would have witnessed “the going forth of the commandment
to restore and to build Jerusalem” (Dan. 9:25; Ezra 1:1). But it seems to
me that whilst the prophecy of the 70 years came true in one sense, the
Jews didn’t respond as they should, and so the time of Zion’s true freedom
in the Messianic Kingdom was delayed. Daniel had been petitioning the
Father to not delay beyond the 70 year period in doing this. But in
another sense, the prophecy was re-interpreted; Daniel was now told that
there was to be a “seventy weeks of years” (Dan. 9:24 RSV) period involved
in order to gain ultimate forgiveness for Israel as Daniel had just been
praying for. The 70 years had become “seventy weeks of years”. The command
to rebuild Jerusalem was given in the first year of Cyrus (Ezra 1:1); but
Daniel must have watched in vain for any sign that Zion’s glad morning had
really come. And so it is recorded that in the third year of Cyrus Daniel
was given a vision that confirmed to him that “the thing was true, but the
time appointed was long [Heb. ‘extended’; the word is also translated
“greater”, “more”]: and he understood the thing” (Dan. 10:1). What was
“the thing” that was true, which Daniel sought to understand? Surely it
was the vision of the 70 years that he had sought to “understand” in Dan.
9:2. The Hebrew “dabar”, translated “thing”, is usually translated “word”.
He was comforted that the word of prophecy would come true; it was “noted
in the scripture of truth” (Dan. 10:21). It was just that it had been
extended in its fulfilment; “for yet the vision is for many days” (Dan.
10:14). And this was how he came to “understand the thing / word”. The
essential and ultimate fulfilment of the 70 years prophecy would only be
after a long time, involving 70 “weeks of years”. Thus Daniel came to
“understand” the vision (Dan. 10:1); hence he was so shocked, depressed
and disappointed that the fulfilment would not be in his days. But he is
set up as a representative of those of us in the very last days who shall
likewise “understand” (s.w. Dan. 12:10) the very same prophecies which
Daniel studied. Daniel is described as both understanding, and also not
understanding (Dan. 10:1; 12:8). Surely the idea is that he understood the
principle of deferment and the outline meaning of the prophecy; but he
didn’t understand the details. And so perhaps it is with us who will, or
do, likewise “understand” as Daniel did.
Cyrus of Persia, when the word of the Lord
spoken by Jeremiah was fulfilled"). But it is also said to have been
fulfilled in the second year of Darius: "O Yahweh of Armies, how long will
You not have mercy on Jerusalem and on the cities of Judah, against which
You have had indignation these seventy years?" (Zech. 1:12; the rest of
Zech. 1 shows that God has indeed had mercy on Jerusalem). Daniel 9 could
be reinterpreting the 70 years as 70 'sevens'; or, adding another 70
'sevens' to the 70 years. Clearly fulfilment of time periods can be
delayed or made open to various starting and ending points. Such is the
open ended nature of such prophecies.
The end of the exile and the
restoration was the time when the prophecies of Jeremiah about 70 years
would be fulfilled.
Dan 9:3 I set my face to the Lord God- Daniel prayed with his windows open toward Jerusalem. Yet he was praying to God, not Jerusalem as a city or the temple as a material place. The physical praying toward Jerusalem was merely to focus him upon the essence, that God was still somehow present in ruined, Divinely judged Jerusalem. If however the idea is that he prayed heavenwards, this could be read as him recognizing that as Ezekiel had described, the glory of the Divine presence had indeed now left Jerusalem.
To seek by prayer and petitions, with fasting and sackcloth and ashes- He recognized that Bible prophecy isn't just automatically fulfilled. He realized that the idea of revival after 70 years required prayer and deep repentance. Or maybe that 70 year period had already expired, and so Daniel begs for the restoration to happen. We see here the openness of God, which is a function of His extreme sensitivity to human prayer and repentance. This is why the 70 year period was understood by Daniel to be flexible, and why there are various time periods in Daniel which apparently reflect the varying possibilities in fulfilment. This is why we can never construct an exact chronology of latter day events in advance. So much is open.
"Petitions", Heb. hanan, is a form of the common word for 'grace'. He was looking for grace, realizing, as he clearly states, that Israel have sinned, broken the covenant and didn't deserve anything from God.
Dan 9:4 I prayed to Yahweh my God, and made confession, and said, Oh
Lord-
The Hebrew for "prayed" is strictly 'to make intercession'. Daniel wasn't simply asking for something. He saw himself as interceding for Israel, based on his own rightness with God, and begging God to show grace to His impenitent people who had broken His covenant. He failed and His prayer as it stood went unanswered, in the short term. But the answer was the revelation of the Messiah, who would successfully mediate and make an end of all sin.
John Collins has observed that the prayer "flows smoothly, full of traditional phrases and free of Aramaisms" (Daniel p. 347). This is what we would expect when a native Hebrew speaker prays in Hebrew to his God; we can have every confidence that we are reading the actual words prayed by a man many centuries ago. The Hebrew translated "confession" is the common word used for praise or worship. To confess sin in such true penitence is the ultimate worship; we too easily associate worship with musical performance, but this is not the idea in Hebrew thought. God may be worshipped upon or using musical instruments, but the essence of worship is within the heart.
The great and dreadful God- The phrase is used to distinguish God from the gods of the nations (Dt. 7:21; 10:17; 1 Chron. 16:25; Ps. 96:4; there are many allusions to Deuteronomy in this prayer). Daniel realized that idolatry was the essence of Israel's sin. That there is only one God has such huge implications in human life. This title of God is also used by Nehemiah (Neh. 1:5; 4:14; 9:32). Nehemiah was also influenced in his prayer of penitence by Daniel's prayer. We too should reflect Biblical influence in our words and reasoning; in this sense the Bible becomes a living word, a word for our lives.
Who keeps covenant and loving kindness with those who love Him and keep His commandments- Daniel accepts that covenant relationship requires obedience, and yet he is going to confess that Israel have been disobedient; and he has faith that despite their continued disobedience, his singular repentance and prayer might be accepted by God, so that the covenant blessings might be restored to Israel. This speaks to the issue of whether God's grace is conditional or not. As Daniel states, the grace of "loving kindness" of the new covenant is conditional upon obedience; and yet that grace is such by its nature that we can hope to receive this grace despite personal disobedience, through the mediation of another (the Lord Jesus, in our case). If Daniel had not understood that, he would not have prayed this prayer as he did.
It has been well argued that the prayers of Dan. 9 and Neh. 9 alludes heavily to Zechariah and Haggai's calls for repentance in order that the Kingdom be reestablished. "In both we see the key role of the prophets in warning the earlier generation (Zech. 1:4, 5, 6; 7:7, 12; cf. Neh. 9:26, 30; Ezra 9:10–11; Dan. 9:6, 10) and the use of the construction of ביד to speak of the agency of these prophets (Zech. 7:12; cf. Neh. 9:30; Ezra 9:11; Dan 9:10). In both we see the function of the law as the standard rejected by the earlier generation (Zech. 7:12; cf. Neh. 9:16,29,34; Ezra 9:10, 14; Neh. 1:7; Dan. 9:5, 10,11) and the near identity of the words of the prophets and the law (Zech. 7:12; 1:6a; cf. Neh. 9:29,34; Dan. 9:10,11). In both the earlier generation is identified as אבות (Zech. 1:2, 4, 5, 6; 8:14; cf. Neh. 9:2,9,34,36; Ezra 9:7; Neh. 1:6; Dan. 9:16; Ps. 106:6,7) and the sin of that generation is linked with the present generation (Zech. 1:6b, 8:14; cf. Neh. 9:32–37; Ezra 9:6–7; Neh. 1:6–7; Dan. 9; Ps. 106:6). Finally, in both there is an admission of the justice of God (Zech. 1:6b; cf. Neh. 9:33; Ezra 9:15; Dan. 9:6,14)".
Dan 9:5 We have sinned and have dealt perversely, and have done
wickedly, and have rebelled, even turning aside from Your precepts and
from Your ordinances- The prayers of Ezra 9 and Neh. 9 are similar to
this prayer, with the faithful individual taking upon himself the guilt of
the nation. Ezra, Nehemiah and Daniel were likely inspired and encouraged
by the examples of each other in doing so. It is the very opposite of the
guilt by association mentality which is so strongly within human nature,
and which has been wrongly glorified in so many religious communities.
These men eagerly accepted the guilt by association, because they so loved
God's people and were themselves part of that people. The Lord Jesus on
the cross exemplified this attitude. As stated in :4, covenant
relationship and the related blessings were conditional upon obedience;
Israel had been disobedient, and were impenitent on an individual level.
And yet as noted on :4, that grace is such by its nature that we can hope
to receive this grace despite personal disobedience, through the mediation
of another (the Lord Jesus, in our case). If Daniel had not understood
that, he would not have prayed this prayer as he did.
"Done wickedly" translates the word usually understood as 'condemned', and the word for "ordinances" [literally 'verdicts'] continues the legal language. Israel had sinned and been condemned. And yet Daniel even at this stage pleads for their restoration and salvation. Paul develops this in Romans; we are condemned sinners, the verdict has been given; and yet even in our dire situation we can still be not only forgiven but counted righteous, thanks to the new covenant in Christ. The essence of the new covenant was what was promised to Abraham, so it was in operation at Daniel's time.
The triple mention of "sin... iniquity... and wickedness" is answered in :24. These were to be dealt with [and in a more permanent and more glorious way] by the work and cutting off of Messiah. The very thought of which initially would have struck desperation and bitter disappointment into Daniel's heart. Likewise :16,18 and :20 speak of the city, temple and people. Dan. 9:24 says these will suffer- but be restored by the 'cut off' Messiah. For us too, the very things that strike deep into our hearts with desperation, illness, death itself etc., are in the end all part of a far more glorious and eternal salvation than any immediate answer to our prayers could ever achieve.
Dan 9:6 Neither have we listened to Your servants the prophets, who
spoke in Your name to our kings, our princes, and our fathers, and to all
the people of the land- The prophetic ministry is not described in
such detail in the historical accounts. This verse implies that they spoke
not simply occasionally to kings and leaders, but to absolutely everyone
in Israelite society. Daniel was himself a prophet and yet he identifies
himself here with the disobedient people, whom "we" had not listened to.
This deep self-identity with sinners when not having sinned personally in
that way is the essence of the work of the Lord Jesus and of all those in
Him.
Dan 9:7 Lord, righteousness belongs to You, but to us shame of face,
as at this day- As explained on :5, Israel had sinned and were in
shame. Confession of sin involves an acceptance that Yahweh is righteous,
and we are not. We see the same in David's confessions of sin after the
Bathsheba incident. One title of the Lord Jesus is "the Lord our
righteousness"; our confessed sin is a declaration that the Lord is
righteous, and through imputed righteousness, all those in the Lord Jesus
are therefore and thereby declared as righteous. If righteousness "belongs
to You", then we are to identify with that righteousness rather than our
own sinfulness. On a psychological level, the essence of repentance and
indeed Christianity is a question of identity; despite our past and
ongoing sinfulness, with whom and with what do we essentially
self-identify? With our sin, or His righteousness?
To the men of Judah, and to the inhabitants of Jerusalem, and to all Israel, who are near and who are far off, through all the countries where You have driven them, because of their trespass that they have trespassed against You- Daniel and Judah were in captivity, but the ten tribe kingdom of Israel had been scattered by the Assyrians much earlier. But Daniel's vision was that repentance by himself and the remnant of Judah could lead to a total restoration of all Israel, in line with the prophecies of the restoration.
Dan 9:8 Lord, to us belongs shame of face, to our kings, to our
princes, and to our fathers, because we have sinned against You- This
repeated emphasis upon "shame of face" (:7) or 'blushing' reflects how
deeply Daniel felt the presence of God. In that presence, he as it were
blushed with shame. This is how close we can realize God's presence. In
:6, Daniel has spoken of the shame of the same categories, the kings,
princes, fathers and common people. Daniel was a prince (Dan. 1:9), but
here he identifies himself with the common people. He speaks of "us", and
then the kings, princes and fathers. He is a powerful example of
identifying with people in order to try to save them, just as God did in
His very human Son. And our outreach to the world is likewise at its best
when we identify with our target audience. He had
learnt all this from Jeremiah, whose prophecies he was now considering:
"righteousness belongs unto You, but unto us [Jeremiah included]
confusion of faces" (Jer. 7:19).
Dan 9:9 To the Lord our God belong mercies and forgiveness; for we
have rebelled against Him- The term "mercies and forgiveness" is only
used twice, and each time about how the punished exiles could receive
mercy and forgiveness if they repented (1 Kings 8:50; Is. 55:7). But they
had not repented, yet Daniel seeks to as it were do this for them.
"Rebelled" is the word and idea used of how Israel rebelled against God in
the desert and therefore didn't return to the promised land (Num. 14:9),
and the word is repeatedly used about those who apparently rebelled in not
wanting to inherit the land intended for them (Josh. 22:16,18,19,29). The
same had happened with the exiles; they had rebelled, and most of them
preferred to remain in Babylon rather than enter the promised land (Neh.
9:26; Ez. 2:3; 20:38). Daniel is aware of the situation, and yet has the
spiritual vision to believe that in the spirit of Moses influencing God to
all the same save Israel, so he could perhaps alter the nation's
condemnation and bring about the immediate restoration of the Kingdom in
his lifetime. God didn't agree to this, giving the 70 weeks prophecy as
His response; after all, most of Judah had remained in Babylon and didn't
want the good news of the restored Kingdom. The essence of Daniel's
request would come true, but not the timing. It seems he was too strongly
influenced by his personal desire not to die and to see the restored
Messianic Kingdom in his own lifetime.
Dan 9:10 Neither have we obeyed the voice of Yahweh our God to walk in
His laws, which He set before us by His servants the prophets- We
note that the words of the prophets were still counted as God's "law"
(:11); this means that the "law" could be ammended, added to, and also
subtracted from. Many of the laws were only really applicable to Israel in
the wilderness; and this affects the issue of the Sabbath. The laws were
not eternal but flexible, even in Old Testament times; and this paves the
way for understanding the abrogation of those laws by the Lord's death.
Another take is that the "laws" in view were those given by the prophets, not those mediated to Israel by the priests as the law of Moses was. Possibly what is in view are the laws for the restoration given in Ez. 40-48 and the offer of a new covenant by Jeremiah and Ezekiel. All this had been unresponded to by God's people. God had offered to write His laws in the hearts of the exiles. And they had refused to be open to that.
Daniel's confession in :10-12 is full of allusion to Deuteronomy. He is admitting that Israel broke the old covenant and are receiving the results of doing so. Yet he still asks for forgiveness and restored relationship with God. This is his way of asking that the promised new covenant be put into operation by God. This request was answered in the 70 weeks prophecy, which speaks of Messiah being cut off and the ultimate ending of sin and its consequences. It was just that the timing was not going to be immediate, as Daniel hoped. But the essence of his prayer was to be gloriously answered, on a scale far beyond what he could have then imagined.
Dan 9:11 Yes, all Israel have transgressed Your law- Again Daniel
focuses upon the ten tribes as well as Judah, "all Israel", because his
vision was for the fulfilment of the prophecies of Israel's total
restoration from wherever they had been scattered.
Turning aside, that they should not obey Your voice- The "turning aside" was in order that they should not obey; the idea is that they turned their ears away so that they didn't hear what they had to obey. I suggest that the psychological basis for all apparently intellectual failure to understand God's voice is because we subconsciously fear that if we understand rightly, we shall have to obey. See on :18.
Therefore the curse and the oath written in the law of Moses the servant of God has been poured out on us; for we have sinned against Him- The Mosaic curse for disobedience to the oath was punishment "seven times". Daniel seems to have thought that the sacking of the temple and Babylonian exile was that "seven times" punishment. The prophecy of the 70 weeks seems to be saying that the time of punishment was not yet over, not least because Israel had not repented, and most of the Jews preferred to remain in Babylon rather than participate in the restoration.
Dan 9:12 He has confirmed His words which He spoke against us, and
against our judges who judged us, by bringing on us a great evil- The
term "great evil" is exactly that used about the "great evil" of Judah's
sins (Ezra 9:13; Neh. 13:27; Jer. 44:7). The sin was in effect its own
punishment; the "great evil" of their sin was matched with the "great
evil" of the Babylonian invasion and exile (Jer. 16:10; 32:42).
For under the whole Heaven such has not been done as has been done to Jerusalem- Daniel would have been unable to legitimately say this if he referred to the whole planet; for all he knew, similar desolations had been wrought in other places and times. "The whole Heaven" in view was as it were the sky over the land promised to Abraham, the earth-heaven system in Daniel refers specifically to that area, as I have explained on Dan. 2 and Dan. 7.
Dan 9:13 As it is written in the law of Moses, all this evil has come
on us: yet have we not entreated the favour of Yahweh our God, that we
should turn from our iniquities, and accept Your truth-
Daniel
doesn't say 'We have not prayed for forgiveness', rather does he say 'We
have not prayed that we might be turned away from our sins'. The promised
blessing of the Spirit, that which was promised to Abraham, was not simply
forgiveness but a being turned away from our sins, the same phrase is used
in Acts 3:26. Daniel realized likewise that the gift of a holy spirit can
be received from God; He can give us a new worldview, a new pair of eyes,
a psychological acceptance of Divine truth. Daniel recognizes that sin is
addictive, and we need to pray for direct Divine action upon the human
heart so that we might turn away from sin and accept His Truth.
Although
Judah had not turned away from their sins, Daniel uses the same word to
ask God to turn away His judgment of Zion (:16). He clearly had the
spiritual vision to believe in the power of God's grace to accept the
mediation of just one person, on behalf of those who are impenitent. We
think of how the Lord accepted the faith of the friends on behalf of their
friend (Mk. 2:5). "The truth" which they should accept would be the great
truth that they had sinned, and that God through His grace could save them
out of that sin to restoration through the Spirit. "Mercy and truth" is a
common phrase for the promises to Abraham, and according to Acts 3:26 the
turning away from sins is part of this covenant promise.
The greatest, final truth is that we hopeless sinners have been forgiven
by grace. And will surely be saved.
"Accept your truth" can be rendered as RV "have discernment in Thy truth". Meaning to acquire insight into God’s revealed will, and to think and act in accordance with it. This is the meaning of "understand" in Dan. 9:25; 11:33,35; 12:3,10. Daniel repeatedly does not understand these later visions of God's word. He feels this is because of how closely identified he is with Israel in their sinfulness and judgment for it.
Dan 9:14 Therefore has Yahweh watched over the evil, and brought it on
us-
The idea of God 'watching' to fulfil His word in Dan. 9:14 is also taken from Jeremiah, who begins his prophecy speaking of the almond tree, the tree of watching over or hastening (Jer. 1:11,12). The idea was that God watches for the moment to make His word come true, whether for good or evil. This of itself shows us the nature of Bible prophecy. The prophetic words are not determinate, meaning that certain things will happen regardless of human freewill. God has stated His intentions, and is waiting for the right time to fulfil it. Hence Daniel alludes to this idea, because He wants God to in one sense hasten His plan to re-establish His Kingdom, and wants Him there and then to seize the opportunity to fulfil it. In other words, God watches eagerly for human behaviour and required preconditions which enable Him to judge or save. Thus He waits until a certain amount of iniquity has built up before judging sinners; and waits in Daniel's case [or, as Daniel then understood it] for a certain amount of prayer and penitence before fulfilling His word of final salvation.
The implication could be that the evil is pronounced, but there is a period of time after that during which repentance is possible. This was clearly seen in the lives of Nebuchadnezzar and Belshazzar. But because Judah refused to repentant, God watched over the evil and brought it upon them. The idea may be that the Angels who are the eyes of Yahweh watched upon it, i.e. they brought it about.
For Yahweh our God is righteous in all His works which He does, and we have not obeyed His voice- Again we see that repentance involves the declaration of God as right and ourselves as wrong (Ps. 51:4 etc. "Against You, and You only, have I sinned, and done that which is evil in Your sight; that You may be proved right when You speak, and justified when You judge").
Dan 9:15 Now, Lord our God, You who brought Your people forth out of the land of Egypt with a mighty hand, and has gotten Yourself renown, as at this day; we have sinned, we have done wickedly- Daniel wished God to bring Judah back from Babylon to the land just as He had brought Israel out of Egypt to the same land. But the reality was that most of Jewry remained in Babylon and didn't want to restore the kingdom themselves.
Dan 9:16 Lord, according to all Your righteousness, please let Your
anger and Your wrath be turned away- The spirit of this prayer is
that God has rightly decreed judgment upon Israel, but the course of that
projected history can be changed or ammended in outworking by prayer and
repentance. This is similar to what Nebuchadnezzar and Belshazzar
experienced, both being given the chance to repent in order to avoid
stated judgments. The openness of God is seen clearer in Daniel than
anywhere else. Daniel prayed at this point because Jer. 29:10-14 had
predicted that after the 70 years, Judah would pray to God and the kingdom
be restored; and Daniel saw himself as representative of Judah, reasoning
that the prayer of just one man could be counted as that of the nation.
Although in this case God didn't accept that, the principle was valid and
is exemplified in the work and mediation of the Lord Jesus for us: "For
thus says Yahweh, After seventy years are accomplished for Babylon, I will
visit you and perform My word of grace towards you, in causing you to
return to this place. For I know the thoughts that I think towards you,
says Yahweh, thoughts of peace, and not of evil, to give you hope and a
future. You shall call on Me, and you shall go and pray to Me, and I will
listen to you. You shall seek Me and find Me, when you shall search for Me
with all your heart. I will be found by you, says Yahweh, and I will turn
again your captivity, and I will gather you from all the nations, and from
all the places where I have driven you, says Yahweh; and I will bring you
again to the place from where I caused you to be carried away captive".
From Your city Jerusalem, Your holy mountain; because for our sins, and for the iniquities of our fathers, Jerusalem and Your people have become a reproach to all who are around us- The same word for "reproach" is repeatedly used in Nehemiah of the "reproach" of Judah even after the exiles returned. The end of Judah's "reproach" was associated with the projected restoration from Babylon and reestablishment of God's Kingdom in the form of Judah under a Messianic ruler (Is. 54:4; Ez. 36:15,30 cp. Joel 2:19). But while God's word was a "reproach" to Judah, so their reproach would continue (Jer. 6:10 s.w.). Judah's reproach was to be "eternal" (Jer. 23:40), but Daniel believed that the restoration prophecies about the removal of reproach would reverse this. So to pray for the "reproach" to end was tantamount to asking for the prophecies of the restoration to come true. Daniel certainly had spiritual ambition and vision in praying for this, when the spiritual preconditions in Judah were simply not there. He had learnt from the example of Moses and his own life, that God is prepared to bless a spiritually weak majority for the sake of a righteous minority and their intercession. And this is the essence of what was achieved in the Lord Jesus, as Rom. 1-8 makes clear.
The "great mountain" of God's Kingdom fills the whole earth, but the mountain initially begins at one point on the planet. Elsewhere in Daniel, the mountain is defined superficially as Jerusalem: "Your city Jerusalem, even Your holy mountain". The toes are therefore specifically dominating Jerusalem at the initial point of impact of the stone upon the land. And this is what we would expect from an Islamist confederacy dominating the land of Israel- Jerusalem is the key issue for them. And we know from Zechariah that "the city shall be taken".
Dan 9:17 Now therefore, our God, listen to the prayer of Your servant, and to his petitions- Daniel had the vision to believe that "just" for the sake of his singular intercession, this restoration of God's Kingdom in Judah could occur. He clearly understood 'the power of one', as Peter Stringer put it to me some years ago. This is the spirit of Christ in Daniel; for our redemption as condemned sinners is on account solely of His work for us, the just for the unjust.
And cause Your face to shine on Your sanctuary that is desolate, for the Lord’s sake- The 70 weeks prophecy, given in response to this prayer, speaks of the placing of an abomination which desolates, using the same word as used here for "desolate". The answer was that indeed the desolation would finally be removed, but not when Daniel hoped, i.e. immediately, in his lifetime. The word is repeatedly used in the curses of Lev. 26:22,31,32,34. Lev. 26:35,43 mention that the desolation of the land would be to cover all the Sabbaths and jubilees that had not been kept. The prophecy of seventy sevens of continued desolation until the final cleansing could refer to 70 weeks or Sabbaths or jubilee years. The shining of God's face upon Zion is the language of Isaiah's prophecies of the restoration; Daniel was praying that the Messianic, restored kingdom would then be reestablished on account of his prayer.
Dan 9:18 My God, turn Your ear, and hear-
As noted on :11,
Israel had turned away their ears from God's word lest they understood it
and had to obey it. Daniel recognizes this, but had such an insight into
the depth of God's grace and His willingness to accept the intercession of
just one man, that he asks God all the same to turn
His ear to
Judah's desolation.
Open Your eyes, and see our desolations, and the city which is called by Your name: for we do not present our petitions before You for our righteousness, but for Your great mercies’ sake- Daniel has admitted that Judah have turned their ear away from God (:11) and were impenitent. But he doesn't therefore assume that God will not respond to them. He realizes that grace means that God can cover even that, for the sake of the intercession of the faithful. And so he appeals to God's great grace, admitting that Judah had absolutely no righteousness of their own, and that despite their sins, Zion was still called by God's Name, claimed as His own because He had an eternal purpose with it. This is the great significance of being baptized into that Name and thereby also becoming those claimed as God's very own, whom He will continue to work with according to His purpose even if we turn away from Him.
Daniel speaks of presenting the prayers of others, as if he were a priest. When he was from the royal family, and therefore from Judah. Likewise the whole work of intercession with God for Israel's sins was what the High Priest did on the Day of Atonement. He was forced by circumstance and lack of a visible high priest to do this, just as many who feel unqualified are forced by circumstance to pastor their families or other flocks of God's people.
Dan 9:19 Lord, hear; Lord, forgive; Lord, listen and do; don’t defer,
for Your own sake, my God, because Your city and Your people are called by
Your name- As noted on :18, this appeal was for God to hear a people
who didn't hear Him (see on :11), to forgive those who were impenitent, to
listen to those who didn't listen to God. It was an appeal to His absolute
grace and willingness to accept intercession. And that grace was 'God's
own sake', it is at the very heart of God and is the quintessence of all
He is and stands for. "Don't defer" reflects Daniel's understanding that
the purpose of God can be delayed or deferred; the 70 years prophecy of
Jeremiah appeared to him to be being delayed in fulfilment, and
the answer
he receives in the 70 weeks prophecy is effectively a deferment. Is. 46:13
could mean that at the final restoration, Zion's redemption will no longer
be delayed (s.w.); and Rev. 10:6 is clear that in the last days,
there will be "delay no longer". We may appeal against it, as Daniel does
here, knowing that God is open to dialogue. But He also knows best and
operates His delays and hastenings with a justice and grace beyond our
comprehension.
The climax of the prayer is in this verse, which has seven Hebrew words in it. And the climax of those words is "Do not defer". This is what Daniel was leading up to. Daniel perceived the idea of God prolonging and delaying the final restoration, in that in Daniel 9 he begs that God will not in fact delay; for the visions of Dan. 7 and Dan. 8 all spoke of a delay in the restoration compared to his time. He was heard in that an Angel was caused to fly swiftly (:21), implying a speeding up of the Angelic processes; but still the delay remained in place because despite that, Israel refused to adequately repent. One could argue that the prayer wasn't answered- in fact there was a further delay, and the request for the current "delay" to be ended wasn't answered at all. Yet it was certainly 'heard'; and an Angel was caused to fly swiftly in response. But as with the Lord's unanswered prayer for deliverance from actual death on the cross, the answer in the end was the more glorious. The answer that Messiah would come but be killed and that Jerusalem would yet again be trashed... would have struck at the core heart of Daniel, dashing all his short term hopes. But that was to be the world's redemption. And it is the same with our apparently unanswered prayers...
Dan 9:20 While I was speaking, and praying, and confessing my sin and
the sin of my people Israel- Daniel was aware that he too was
a sinner, although the record presents him as almost spotless. Or it could
be that he felt so identified with the sin of Israel that he felt personal
guilt because of it. This helps us understand how the absolutely perfect
Lord Jesus could be made a sin offering for us, could be identified with
sinners to such an extreme extent that He died the death of a criminal on
a Roman cross. I will note on Dan. 10:17 that Daniel had yet to be even
deeper convicted of his own sins and also those of Judah.
And presenting my supplication before Yahweh my God for the holy mountain of my God- Note the personal pronouns. As I have repeatedly noted, he believed in 'the power of one', that 'just' one righteous man interceding for a sinful nation could cause their restoration and salvation. This is immense encouragement to us in our intercession for others who currently are far from God; see on Mk. 2:5.
The language of prayer and supplication is what Daniel did in Dan. 6, when the king's men "found Daniel making petition and supplication before his God" (Dan. 6:11). His regular habit of prayer continued, resulting in the deeper insight he now experienced in it.
Dan 9:21 Yes, while I was speaking in prayer- We are to
imagine Daniel praying out loud.
The man Gabriel- Gabriel was an Angel, but was clearly portrayed as a man and perceived in that way by Daniel. Angels represent men and nations in Daniel, and are strongly identified with those they represent; so it is appropriate to call this Angel a "man".
Whom I had seen in the vision at the beginning- Gabriel had first appeared in Dan. 8:16; but the vision of Dan. 8 was given before the events of Dan. 9 (Dan. 8:1 cp. Dan. 9:1). So the idea is 'the vision I had seen earlier'. But "beginning" means just that. Perhaps the idea is that the vision of Dan. 8 was the beginning of the motivation Daniel received to pray that events might work out differently, and God's purpose be hastened. Gabriel came to explain the vision of Dan. 8. Daniel's desire to understand the 2300 period was answered now- with a different time period. The kaleidoscope of fulfilment had turned again.
Being caused to fly swiftly- See on :19. God's purpose and response was indeed hastened; although the chronological hastening of events was not granted to Daniel, he was assured that God was not therefore indifferent, and had immediately responded. The implication is that Gabriel had been sent forth from Heaven to earth by God to explain the vision to Daniel. It seems that great stress is placed in Scripture on the Angels physically moving through space, both on the earth and between Heaven and earth, in order to fulfil their tasks, rather than being static in Heaven or earth and bringing things about by just willing them to happen. See on Gen. 18:10. An alternative reading is that Gabriel was caused to "fly with weariness" (Dan. 9:21 AVmg.); this would then be an example of the Bible’s ‘language of limitation’ which may refer to the Angels rather than God personally. The Angel flying swiftly should be compared with the passages which talk about running swiftly in order to understand and obey God's word (Hab. 2:2; Amos 8:11,12; Ps. 147:15; Dan. 12:4; 2 Thess. 3:1). Dan. 8:18 also describes how the Angel gave Daniel spiritual revelation.
Touched me about the time of the evening offering- The daily offerings were presumably not made in captivity, but Daniel's heart was very much in the land of promise and in the hope of the restoration of Israel's kingdom. He therefore calculated time according to the time of the offerings. Daniel understood his prayers as an offering to God (as in Ps. 141:2), and Gabriel therefore responded appropriately, answering prayer at the time of the evening sacrifice. In Dan. 8:18, the touch of Gabriel, literally 'laying the hand upon', is a sign of Daniel's acceptance. And so we learn that even if our prayers aren't answered as we wish, this is not to say that we are not acceptable with God. Gabriel seems to have been at pains to help Daniel understand this.
We note Daniel prayed at the time of the evening offering, as if his morning and evening prayers were the equivalent of the daily burnt offerings. See on Dan. 8:11. David in the Psalms often talks of praying in the morning, probably because he saw prayer as his morning sacrifice. Indeed it seems that the time was told by reference to the morning and evening sacrifices (1 Kings 18:29,36; 2 Kings 3:20). Regularity in prayer is critically important. Our natures are so weak that we need this kind of discipline.
Dan 9:22 He instructed me, and talked with me, and said, Daniel, I am now come forth to give you wisdom and understanding- This is prophetic of the faithful community in the very last days. The Lord says that when the abomination of desolation appears, then His people should flee Jerusalem; and “let him that reads, understand” (Mt. 24:15-17). Whatever application this had to the events of the three and a half years tribulation of AD67-70 was at best a sketchy and incomplete fulfilment. The tell tale phrase is “let him that reads, understand”. This is inviting us to be like Daniel in Dan. 9:22-25, who also wanted to understand the meaning of the “abomination” prophecy. But he was told that the meaning of that vision about the abomination that desolates would only be revealed in the very last days, i.e. at the time of its fulfilment (Dan. 8:17,26; 12:9). The implication of all this is that there will be believing Jews living in the Jerusalem area at the time of the setting up of the abomination; and they will have special understanding of this prophecy which will lead them to flee. The importance of this for our present study is that this indicates that there will be believers in Israel just before the Lord returns. They will have “understanding” and will be motivated by this to respond. “Let him… understand” is paralleled with “let him that is on the housetop [flee immediately]… let him that is in the field not return”. Understanding leads to action- both then and now.
Dan 9:23 At the beginning of your petitions the commandment went forth, and I have come to tell you; for you are greatly beloved: therefore consider the matter, and understand the vision- Daniel's prayer, at least as it is recorded here, doesn't ask for understanding. Instead it is a request for God to act immediately, to not defer the fulfilment of Jeremiah's '70 years until the restoration, if you pray' prophecy. But God sees through to the essence of our prayers, just as the Lord saw that the essence of the tears and intercessions of Martha and Mary was effectively asking 'Raise Lazarus right now'. And so the essence of Daniel's heart was that he wanted to understand, and this therefore was the answer given. As explained on Rom. 8:26, we know not what to pray for as we ought, but the hidden spirit of our deepest heart is read and understood as our request. We also note in this context that as soon as Daniel prayed, the essence of his heart was read and Gabriel dispatched immediately; he was heard immediately. See on Dan. 10:12.
Daniel didn't understand the 2300 evening-morning period (Dan. 8:27), and in Dan. 9 he is given understanding (Dan. 9:2,22,23). The answer was in the 70 weeks prophecy. "Understand the vision" (Dan. 9:23) prefaces the 70 weeks prophecy, and the vision in view is that of Dan. 8, repeatedly called "the vision" (Dan. 8:1,2,13,15,17,26). The issues of Dan. 9:24 are exactly those of Dan. 8:12-14: transgression will be finished, everlasting righteousness will be brought, and a holy of holies anointed. But just as the 2300 period differs from the 1260 day period of Dan. 7, so the interpretation in Dan. 9 differs. Because the 70 weeks period is not 2300 evening-mornings. Likewise the 1260,1290 and 1335 day periods of Dan. 12 seem to offer yet another scenario. The language of Dan. 12:10,11 is that of Dan. 11:31-35, initially about the possible fulfilment in Antiochus Epiphanes. Surely we have to conclude that the time periods are flexible and changeable, as God factors in all the possible fulfilments in line with human freewill decisions. This really has to be the case, for otherwise Divine prophecy would be simply deterministic and rob man of any freewill.
Dan 9:24 Seventy weeks are decreed on your people and on your holy city, to finish disobedience, and to make an end of sins, and to make reconciliation for iniquity, and to bring in everlasting righteousness, and to seal up vision and prophecy, and to anoint the most holy- The end point of the 70 weeks was to be the time when they would no longer be punished for their sins and would be reconciled to God. All prophecy would then be sealed or finished. Any other end point apart from the Lord's second coming is therefore not going to fit the requirements perfectly. We will discuss various intriguing possibilities, but these were all potential fulfilments which didn't work out. The rabbis teach that "The number of seven weeks is four hundred and ninety years. The Babylonian exile was seventy [years] and the Second Temple stood four hundred and twenty" (Rashi). In this case the coming of Messiah would have been at the destruction of the temple in AD70, and that is exactly when the Lord could have come- but didn't. A prophecy of 70 weeks means 70 weeks or sevens- any interpretation that supposes a gap within the weeks is problematic. Because it takes away the obvious meaning of a time period. If I promise to come to your home after exactly seven weeks, my promise is falsified if I come to you exactly ten weeks later- explaining that in fact I had come after seven weeks, it's just that I inserted a gap of three weeks into my calculation of what "seven weeks" means. I would therefore suggest that the seventy sevens had various potential fulfiments that didn't come about, and may [at least in essence] have a final fulfilment at some later point in the actual "last days".
This prophecy is God's response to Daniel's request that Israel's sin would be overlooked and forgiven, so that they could be restored and judgment would end. Despite the fact they were largely impenitent. Daniel was totally identified with Israel in their sinfulness, and hoped that he could be accepted as their representative, so that his devotion to God and bearing of Israel's sin would be accepted by God. The answer was in the prophecy of the anointed one, the Christ, doing this job and playing this role- through His death. So Daniel's perception was correct and the essence of his prayer was heard- in the work and death of the Lord Jesus.
The chapter begins with Daniel praying for Jeremiah's prophecy of the 70 years desolation of Judah to be brought to an end. But Daniel and those who lived after him in the Maccabean period would have struggled to understand how this prophecy had been fulfilled, with Jerusalem still not liberated. I suggest that the 70 weeks prophecy is a reinterpretation of the 70 years prophecy of Jeremiah. The preconditions for the restoration were not met. Most of Judah preferred the soft life in Babylon, and as the restoration prophets make clear, the few who did return failed to fulfil the prophecies of restoration. They did not build nor operate the temple according to the requirements of Ez. 40-48, and so that prophecy was revealed as conditional, and was perhaps reapplied in a purely spiritual sense, or delayed in fulfilment. And the prophecy of 70 years desolation is now extended and tweaked by this prophecy of 70 sevens. But the simple takeaway point was and is that the period of Gentile domination of God's people is limited, an end will come, however delayed. The day for a year interpretation doesn't have to be pushed; the "sevens" could refer to "seven weeks of years". The idea of seven weeks of years, i.e. 49 years, must make every Jewish mind think of the year of Jubilee. 70 x 49 = 3430 years; but the problem is fixing when the first Jubilee was kept after Israel entered the land of Canaan under Joshua. And then there is the problem of the significance of the 7, 62 and final 1 week, which on this basis do not yield any particularly significant chronological points. It is significant that one of the few indirect references to the year of Jubilee in Scripture is in the time of Hezekiah, where it would appear that the great invasion of the land by the Assyrians was in a Jubilee year (Is. 37:30 and context). That invasion and its dramatic destruction by God's direct intervention would therefore typify the events at the end of the final half week, 3.5 year period of suffering.
The language of the ending of sin and bringing in eternal righteousness naturally has some application to the Lord's finished work upon the cross. The whole prophecy was in prospect fulfilled then, but only in the 'now but not yet' sense that we encounter continually throughout the Bible. God for the sake of that prayer of the Lord Jesus Christ on the cross [“Father forgive them”] forgave us all our sins then (Eph. 4:32), the whole concept of sin was ended in prospect (Dan. 9:24), one final sacrifice was offered for sins (Heb. 10:12). The result of this is that we should repent, search ourselves and confess as many of our sins as possible, knowing they have been conquered. And we too should forgive each other in the same manner as we have been forgiven (Eph. 4:32), not waiting for repentance, but learning the spirit of the Lord Jesus and the attitude of our Father.
"I have finished the work which You gave me to do", ultimately finished when Christ cried "It is finished" (Jn. 17:4; 19:30), alludes to several Old Testament passages. Daniel 9:24 had prophesied that Messiah's sacrifice would "finish transgression... make an end of sins... make reconciliation for iniquity...bring in everlasting righteousness... and to anoint the Most Holy", as if a new sanctuary were being inaugurated. In prospect, the whole concept of sin was destroyed at the point of Christ's death, the devil (sin) was destroyed, the opportunity for us to have the everlasting righteousness of Christ imputed to us was opened up. "It is finished" may well have been uttered with an appreciation of this passage (for surely Dan. 9 was in the mind of our dying Lord). In this case, Christ died with the final triumphant thought that our sinfulness had now been overcome. Surely this should inspire us to a fuller and more confident, joyful faith in this.
But when we come to try to fit this in to the chronology of the 70 weeks prophecy, it is clear that the 70 weeks do not end on the cross. There are no significant events in the week and half week before this, nor 62 weeks before that last week. We must look to the last days for a complete, best fit fulfilment.
"To make an end of sins" is the same idea [in different words] to what we have in Dan. 8:23, when Antiochus or the little horn arises when "the wicked [or, wickedness] have come to the full", or "when the transgressors have completed (their guilt)", a similar idea to the iniquity of the Amorites becoming full, i.e. judgment came after a specified period. And why like that? Because that period was their opportunity for repentance. We marvel that a hardened blasphemer like Antiochus could be given a hope of repentance. We think of how God likewise tried to get Pharaoh, Nebuchadnezzar and Belshazzar to repent and gave them a specific time period. It's the same idea of God elsewhere waiting until "the cup of iniquity was full" before judging as in Gen. 15:16: “The iniquity of the Amorites is not yet full”. Likewise Mt. 23:32: “fill you up then the measure of your fathers” and 1 Thess. 2:16: “to fill up their sins”. This is the time of Dan. 9:24 "To make an end of sins". But that verse in Dan. 9 is in the midst of a quite different chronology, of the 70 weeks prophecy. Again we have to conclude that there were various chronological schemes that were potentially possible, such is God's sensitivity to human freewill, and His refusal to make His prophecies simply determinate predictions that rob man of his freewill.
Bringing in everlasting righteousness was the message of the new covenant offered to the exiles. There would be a future king named Yahweh Our Righteousness (Jer. 23:5,6; 33:15,16). This is the same as the anointed one, the Christ, the Lord Jesus. No such king-Messiah appeared before Him; but this was the potential in Cyrus and perhaps others. This provision of righteousness was the answer to the prayer in :16: "according to all Your righteousness, please let Your anger and Your wrath be turned away from Your city Jerusalem". The answer to that was in the provision of "The Lord our righteousness", the Lord Jesus. Every aspect and request of Daniel's prayer was answered not as he hoped for [immediate restoration of the Kingdom and forgiveness of Israel by God, yet again]- but in a far more glorious way. In the work of the Lord Jesus, a permanent end being made to sin, and the Kingdom of God being re-established eternally and far more wonderfully than Daniel had in mind. And so it is for so many of our apparently unanswered prayers.
The conditional, potential nature of the 70 weeks prophecy is perhaps hinted at by the use of the word "decreed". The Hebrew word is unusual in that it occurs only here, and is hard to define. It is unclear whether this period was set in stone or not. The period had been cut out [one possible meaning of the Hebrew word], but that doesn't mean it had to be fulfilled literally.
The Lord seems to have had His mind on the idea of seventy sevens
when He taught that this is how much forgiveness we must give people.
Babylon was given 70 years until judgment; Israel were given 70 sevens,
unlimited patience and forgiveness. That was His take on the prophecy.
Dan 9:25 Know therefore and discern, that from the going forth of the commandment to restore and to build Jerusalem- The commandment that went forth could refer to the commandment issued in response to Daniel's prayer (:23 "At the beginning of your petitions the commandment went forth, and I have come to tell you"). The anointed one / Messiah was to come seven sevens from this point. In seven literal weeks, or seven 'sevens', be they days or something else, with a day possibly standing for a year- Messiah was to come. No significant point can be found historically, whatever starting point we choose- but perhaps Cyrus [or some other figure] was potentially enabled to do something then. Which he didn't.
Or this commandment to restore Jerusalem could refer to that of Jeremiah, who in 605 / 604 BC predicted restoration after 70 years. But the natural objection is that a command to restore could hardly be given before Jerusalem had been destroyed. So the reference could be to the word for restoration given right at this time by Gabriel in :23. Or perhaps the decree of Cyrus is in view (539 BC), or that of Artaxerxes (458 BC) or that given to Nehemiah (445 BC). But again, as noted on :24, no starting point yields significant events after 7, 62 and 69.5 weeks. And one has to imagine an inserted hiatus even if we wish to apply the last 3.5 years to the last days. And this does violence to the whole idea of a 70 week period. A case can be made that perhaps the decree to restore Jerusalem refers to that of Artaxerxes I in Ezra 7:24. If we date that decree as being given in 457 BC, then 69 weeks / 483 days / years takes us to the beginning of the Lord's ministry in AD 27.
To the Anointed One, the prince- The "people of the
prince" in :26 would destroy the sanctuary, and in :27 "he shall cause the
sacrifice and the offering to cease". One clear possible initial
fulfilment would have been in Antiochus Epiphanes. There would have been
an exact match with the account of Josephus that “the daily
offerings which they [the Jews] offered to God according to the law, he
forbade them from offering". And yet still this didn't bring about "the
end". And so there were other alternatives, such as the destruction of
Jerusalem in AD70 with "the prince" being the Lord Jesus at the head of
the Roman armies. This would fit better than Antiochus, who defiled but
didn't destroy the temple. There were various possible fulfilments for the
anointed one, and somehow the prophecy would have worked out for each of
them. It could have been Zerubbabel (Ezra 5:2; Hag. 1:1; Zech. 4:6-10) or
Joshua the High Priest (Zech. 6:11,12). According to Is. 45:1, this
prince potentially could have been Cyrus. But it could have many other referents
(Joshua, Zerubbabel, Ezra, Nehemiah or Sheshbazzar), or to the Angelic
prince Michael who stood for Israel (Dan. 10:21). I suggest below that it
could refer to the Lord Jesus and His work on the cross. But the
chronological problems stubbornly remain. Just as Jeremiah's 70 years
prophecy was recalculated and reapplied into this 70 weeks prophecy, so
this 70 weeks prophecy itself has to be recalculated, and shall come true
in perfection in the last days, perhaps during a literal 70 week or 70
'sevens' period within the final 3.5 year tribulation.
Shall be seven weeks, and sixty-two weeks: it shall be built again,
with street and moat, even in troubled times-
The Lord Jesus is called "Messiah the Prince" in
Dan. 9:25 in order to contrast with how the anti-Christ, the fake Christ,
is also called "the prince of the host" in Dan. 8:11. "It became great,
even as great as the Prince of the host" (ESV). This prince "shall stand
up against the Prince of princes", the Lord Jesus (Dan. 8:25). There will
be a final showdown between these two princes, and their respective
followers and Kingdoms. The rebuilding of the temple coincides with the
appearance of the "Anointed One". And he is "cut off" then (:26). This
just doesn't fit with an application to the Lord Jesus in the first
century, although on :26 I give a possible attempt to make it fit. But the
coincidence with the rebuilding of the temple is definitely problematic.
So I feel confirmed in repeating that just as the 70 years prophecy was
conditional and was reinterpreted and reapplied in the 70 weeks prophecy,
so that too didn't work out as potentially possible because of Judah's
impenitence. It will in essence come true in the last days, perhaps in a
literal period of 70 weeks during the three and a half year tribulation.
"Seven weeks, and sixty-two weeks" is a poor attempt to reflect
the Hebrew. There is a distinct break after the "seven weeks"; so we could
translate "seven weeks, and [then after that] sixty-two weeks". It has
been observed: "the 'athnach, the strongest disjunctive Masoretic accent
mark between verse dividers, separates the "seven weeks" from the
"sixty-two weeks," rather than joining them into a corporate entity
equaling "sixty-nine"". It is hard to find
specific points of fulfilment after the seven weeks. Likewise there was no
time historically when Jerusalem was rebuilt with streets or squares-
spaces for forum, market and justice court; as well as ‘moats’, referring
to a defence system of canals like Babylon had.
This is a stubborn problem for those who wish to argue that this part of
the 70 weeks prophecy has already been fulfilled. It was surely a
conditional prophecy, and it too has had to be reinterpreted, reapplied
and recalculated.
Dan 9:26 After the sixty-two weeks the Anointed One shall be cut off-
The Hebrew of :26 and :27 is very difficult and ambiguous in places. Thus nagid [ruler, prince] is used rather than melek, the standard word for king. I suggest this was purposeful. Just as I noted above that the words of the "seventy years" prophecy of Jer, 25:11,12 were ambiguous as to whether "seventy years" were meant, or an undefined period of "weeks of years". All this is because God's plan was open-ended and conditional, and has [and had] various possible fulfilments and iterations.
I discussed on Dan. 8:11 how shocking this would have been to Daniel. It fits into a major theme that God is apparently defeated, the apparent salvation in Messiah was going to be "cut off". But still God would win in the end.
The reference could be to the killing of the High Priest Onias III in 171 BC as recorded in 2 Macc. 4:23-28 (also mentioned in Dan. 11:22). This would have been 62 weeks / 434 years after the prophecy of Jeremiah about the 70 years in BC 605. That would require the initial seven week / 49 year period to run concurrently with the 62 week period. But the temptation is to apply it to the murder of the Lord Jesus, the Christ / anointed one. The prophecy clearly had multiple possible applications, but none of them seem to fit exactly. This is not due to some prophetic miscalculation; just as the 70 year period to restoration didn't happen because of Judah's lack of repentance, and had to be recalculated and reapplied, so the reapplication was likewise a potential that Judah's lack of repentance precluded from happening. As noted on Hos. 5:15, God's intention was that His people would "acknowledge their offence" in captivity, seek Him- and then be restored.
And shall have nothing: and the people of the prince who shall come shall destroy the city and the sanctuary; and its end shall be with a flood, and even to the end shall be war; desolations are determined-
"And shall have nothing" is AV "but not for himself". If the AV is correct, and the Lord Jesus is this anointed one, then this surely implies He benefitted nothing from His own sacrifice as He was without sin. But "and shall have nothing" recalls how He died forsaken and betrayed by His friends, His clothing divided amongst His killers, buried in the tomb of a non-family member who took pity on His having nothing, apparently forsaken by God, a man who in His life had nowhere to lay His head and was popular with low lifes, and became "the song of the drunkards". This kind of Messiah who 'had nothing' in His death was not exactly the kind of heroic Saviour that Israel wanted.
It is stressed that the sanctuary of God was "cast down" (Dan. 8:11), "trampled under foot" (Dan. 8:13). "destroyed / wasted / spoiled" along with His capital city (Dan. 9:26), "made desolate" (Dan. 9:27). If the city and sanctuary of a god was destroyed in this way, so publically, then that god had lost and had been slain by the god of the army who did this. God as it were emphasizes His own apparent destruction. He recognizes by all this repeated language that indeed, it does look as if "the death of God" has validity, it is how it seems, it is what it looks like. He gets that. The purpose of the prophecies is to show that in fact He exists and is hugely active beyond that. Clearly enough, God doesn't care for His 'image'. He allows people to think as they do about Him, without rushing in to correct impressions. We think of His apparent silence and lack of involvement and engagement at the time of tragedies. It is all a test of our spiritual perception, and we are guided by His word in this.
This appears to have similarities with the desolations of Antiochus IV; the "people / troops of the prince" would then be the Seleucid soldiers who settled in Jerusalem (Dan 11:31; 1 Macc. 1:29-40). But Antiochus didn't destroy the sanctuary; he desolated Jerusalem and defiled the temple (1 Macc. 1:46; 2 Macc. 6:2) but didn't destroy it quite to the extent required by the language here. There are of course similarities with the Roman destruction in AD70, but this Roman approach fails to make any sense in :27. And both references to Antiochus and the Romans run into difficulties in fitting in to the required chronology of the 7, 62 and final one week. The prince to come points to a specific individual, whose people or troops destroy the city and temple. He is an anti-Christ, an imitation of the One who is the true Prince of the kings of the earth (Rev. 1:4,5).
However, a case can be made that the anointed one is the Lord Jesus, the Christ [Messiah, anointed one]. But again, the chronology is problematic, unless the periods are given big gaps between them, especially between the 62 weeks and the last half week. Such gaps seem to do violence to the whole concept of 70 weeks. But some may still find the idea attractive.
In reply to Daniel's prayer, God promises that:
- In the short term, there will be a decree made to enable the rebuilding of Jerusalem;
- A time for the ending of Israel's iniquity does lie ahead; their cleansing will be through the coming of their Messiah;
- To enable this, a new kind of covenant would be established with them;
- The means to forgiveness would involve a doing away of animal sacrifices and a destruction of the temple, with abominable idols standing there making it " desolate" .
- Eventually this desolation would be done away with.
Thus Daniel's prayer for the forgiveness of Israel and his enquiry about the fortunes of the temple is given a complex answer; very soon a command would go forth to rebuild the temple, but the full judgment for Israel's iniquity still had to come. This would be through the death of their Messiah, great desolation of the temple and other times of trouble. However, ultimately the death and work of their Messiah would enable the eventual cleansing of Israel from their iniquities in a permanent fashion, so that never again would God's House lie desolate. After 69 weeks from the decree to rebuild the temple Messiah was to be "cut off". This ought to silence once and for all the constant Jewish objection to a suffering Messiah; he was to be "cut off". The decree of Artaxerxes to rebuild Jerusalem was given in BC457. Commentators have frequently multiplied 69 by 7 to give a period of 483 day/years that were to elapse before Messiah's death. However, Jewish time is often reckoned in Lunar cycles rather than Solar, as Europeans are accustomed to. On the basis of Lunar time, 69 weeks of years comes out at 486.5 Lunar years. Allowing for a BC/AD calendar inaccuracy of 4 years, this brings us to AD33.5 for the time of Messiah being cut off; which is exactly when Jesus was crucified, 33.5 years after his birth.
The 69 weeks being split into 7 weeks and 62 weeks is understandable once it is appreciated that most Bible prophecy has some immediate reference to the period around which it was given. 7 weeks of years would come to around 50 years. According to the records of the rebuilding of Jerusalem in Ezra, Nehemiah and Haggai it would appear that the bulk of the work was done in the 50 years after the issuing of the decree for rebuilding. This mini time period would doubtless have been of great encouragement to the Jews of the time as they laboured in the rebuilding work amidst so much opposition.
The description of the sacrifices ceasing and the temple being desecrated by an "abomination" can comfortably apply to the final destruction of the temple in AD70. Application to the time of the Maccabees is difficult because despite the disruption of the temple services, the sacrifices did not "cease" permanently. The Hebrew word for "cease" is also translated in the Old Testament as "to cause to fail", "suffer to be lacking", "put down", "to rid", "to take away", showing that the sacrifices in the second temple were to be ended permanently. The placing of abominations in the temple sounds like the Roman desecration of it with the idols of their legions after its final capture in AD70. Jesus also interpreted this part of Dan. 9 with reference to the events of AD70 (Mt. 24:15).
The abomination that caused desolation in AD70 can also be referred to the abomination of Israel's sins, which finally resulted in the desolation of both the land and the temple. Dan. 8:11-13 (R.V.) has many connections with this prophecy of Dan. 9: "The daily sacrifice was taken away, and the place of his sanctuary was cast down... an host was given against the daily sacrifice by reason of (Israel's) transgression... the transgression of ('making') desolation". Israel's sins reached the maximum degree to which God was willing to let them accumulate without intervening in judgment. If the Jewish crucifixion of Jesus a few years earlier was indeed their rejection of God's Messiah, then this is understandable. Deuteronomy chapters 28-31 consistently link the ideas of desolation and Israel's disobedience. Josephus (Wars of the Jews, 4.6.6-8) records how the Jewish Zealots made the temple a garrison in AD70 and thoroughly desecrated it by their actions even before the Romans took it.
If the middle of the 70th week was the destruction of the temple in AD70, then it follows that from BC457 to AD70 is 69.5 "weeks". Therefore, if AD70 was the middle of the 70th week, it follows that there was a gap in the fulfilment of the prophecy. Thus it should not appear unreasonable to say that the first 69 weeks had a chronological fulfilment from BC457 to AD33, and that the first half of the 70th week ended in AD70. Now it is of the utmost significance that the Jewish wars which culminated in the sacking of Jerusalem in AD70 began 3.5 years previously in AD66/67. Thus the first half of the 70th week of the judgments upon Jerusalem started at this time. We must ever remember that the 70 weeks prophecy was concerning the judgments upon Jerusalem and how God was going to deal with their sins, which formed the burden of Daniel's initial prayer.
This gap in the 70 weeks between AD33.5 and AD66.5 must be significant. It could imply that something happened in AD33.5 which gave Israel the opportunity to repent, and that during that time the judgments to come upon them were suspended, although being resumed in AD66.5-70, presumably due to Israel's failure to do anything in the former period to avert those judgments? The Christian reasoning surely sounds uncannily true, that Jesus was the Jewish Messiah who was crucified in AD33.5, and that due to Israel's failure to repent as they should have done the judgments continued. It is noteworthy that the judgments on Jerusalem in the first half of the 70th week were to be by Messiah's armies (Dan.9:26). Having been given control of all things on earth (Mt. 28:18) after His resurrection, the Lord Jesus was able to send the Roman armies, effectively His armies, against Jerusalem in judgment. Indeed, He foretold the future destruction of Jerusalem by God's armies (Mt. 22:1-7); which became His when God gave Him all power after His resurrection.
The final half (i.e. 3.5 day/years) of the 70th week is difficult by anyone's standards. Masada, the last outpost of Jewish resistance to the Roman re-invasion, fell in AD73.5, which could suggest that the final part of this week and indeed the whole prophecy, finished then. But we wonder why that point should be the end of Judah and Jerusalem's sufferings and the introduction of eternal righteousness. It was surely not that significant. This would mean that by AD73 "reconciliation for iniquity... everlasting righteousness" as promised in Dan. 9:24 would have been brought in. But surely that was achieved 40 years before, on the cross. The idea of Jesus as the perfect sacrifice which permanently overcame sin, thus doing away with the need for animal sacrifices, seems to fit what happened on the cross, not in AD73. The (new) covenant of Messiah was "confirmed" (the Hebrew implies violently, with strength) during the 70th week (Dan. 9:27), and therefore the Old Covenant of the law (Dt. 4:13) was finally done away then; yet surely this was achieved on the cross (Col. 2:14-17). The "vision and prophecy" being "sealed" (Dan. 9:24) at this stage may hint that it was by AD70 or just after that the Holy Spirit gift of prophecy was taken away, and inspired writing ceased. There is ample internal evidence that the whole New Testament canon was written before AD70. But again, this doesn't seem a totally comfortable, best-fit interpretation.
However, it is also possible to argue that the second half of the 70th week refers to a time yet future. The new covenant of Messiah must be powerfully confirmed to Israel, and finally an end of all Israel's punishment for sin must be made, with the result that an end (i.e. a permanent end) must be made to the powers that desolate Jerusalem (:24,27). Such an end clearly did not come in AD73, and the final deliverance of Israel from God's judgment and desolators of the temple mount must be yet future. Other scriptures suggest that there will be a final 3.5 year downtreading of Jerusalem during which time Messiah's covenant will be confirmed mightily to Israel, and at the end of which time there will be a final end to Israel's sufferings and the destruction of their desolator. There are other references to a 3.5 year period of trouble for God's people in Daniel: "A time (a year), times (two years) and an half", i.e. 3.5 years (Dan. 7:25; 12:7; Rev.1 2:14). The New Testament speaks of a similar period: 1,260 days -also 3.5 years (Rev. 12:6; 11:3); 42 months (3.5 years) (Rev. 11:2; 13:5). It seems fair to assume that they are all speaking of an identical or associated period of time. We have stressed that during the 70th week, the covenant of Messiah will be powerfully confirmed. Therefore we should see this happening during this final 3.5 years; and Mal. 3:1 describes the coming of the future Elijah prophet as "The messenger of the covenant", i.e. he will preach Messiah's covenant to Israel. It is thrilling to find that Jesus and James mention that Elijah's first ministry lasted 3.5 years (Lk. 4:25; James 5:17); it would be so fitting in the light of this for Elijah's second ministry to last the same period of time. Given the present world situation, this 3.5 year downtreading of Israel by those who would take every delight in desecrating Jerusalem and the temple area with their anti-Jewish abominations could begin any moment now.
This interpretation is not without problems. But we can note that the cutting off of Messiah and the temple's destruction do not have to be simultaneous, although they both occurred at some stage after the end of the 62 weeks; Messiah's death resulted in the abolition of the temple, seeing that on account of his death the Old Covenant had been done away.
Josephus describes how the Jews at the time of Jesus were looking for Messiah to come at that time due to their study of Dan. 9 and other such prophecies: "That which chiefly excited them (the Jews) to war was an ambiguous prophecy, that at that time, someone within their country should arise that should obtain the empire of the whole world. This they had received, that it was spoken by one of their nation". This is confirmed by the New Testament recording that "all men were musing in their hearts" about Messiah at this time. Dan. 9 could indicate that Messiah was to have two comings: firstly as a prince, and then returning as a King who has received his Kingdom. This is how the Lord Jesus saw himself in the parable of the nobleman (Lk. 19:12). The time period of 69 weeks from the command to rebuild the city ended in both "Messiah the Prince" (Dan. 9:25) and also in him being "cut off" (Dan. 9:26), i.e. killed. Thus it would appear that it was at His death that Messiah became "the prince", the definite article suggesting that this was the specific Messiah and the greatest ever prince. This is all fulfilled by Jesus Christ's triumphant death/sacrifice being rewarded by His being exalted to God's right hand in Heaven, and being made a "Prince and a Saviour" by Him (Acts 5:31), so that due to His death and subsequent glorification in resurrection he became "the prince of (i.e. over) the kings of the earth" (Rev. 1:5). Messiah's making of "the sacrifice and oblation to cease" was at the end of His 3.5 year ministry. The exposition offered above applies this to His death bringing about the destruction of the temple in AD70.
Dan 9:27 He shall make a firm covenant with many for one week: and in the midst of the week He shall cause the sacrifice and the offering to cease-
Literally, "for half a week he will put a stop to the sacrifice and the meal offering". Dan. 8 gives a period of 2300 evening-mornings, i.e. 1150 days, for the cessation of sacrifices. In Dan. 9:27 the time period is different- three and a half days, possibly meaning three and a half years or 1260 days. So often in Daniel we find the time periods are flexible. Which they are, because there are various possible and potential fulfilments of the prophecies, and the range of them is because God takes into account human freewill. For prophecy doesn't make God deterministic. Possibly these 1260 days are reduced to 1150 because the "days are shortened for the elect's sake". We must also factor in that 1 Maccabees gives a period of exactly 3 years for the desecration of the altar by Antiochus Epiphanes [1080 days if we take a 360 day year, 1095 days if a 365 day year]. This again could be because there was a shortening of the days. Josephus however claims it was exactly three and a half years (Wars 1.32).
The application to the Lord Jesus in the first century runs into problems here. It is hard to make the 69 weeks end at the beginning of the Lord's ministry. The covenant He made was eternal and not just for a week. And if the midst of the week when sacrifices were ended by Him refers to the cross, then it is out of decorum with the idea of 70 weeks that there should be a 2000 year delay until the fulfilment of the second half of the week. The historical fulfilment could have been in the "covenant" reported in 1 Macc. 1:11 between the Jewish hellenizers and Antiochus, which led to the sacrifices being stopped for three and a half years. This certainly fits the 1260 day [three and a half year] period mentioned in Daniel. There was no such covenant made after the Roman destruction of Jerusalem. So
And on the wing of abominations shall come desolation- This "abomination that makes desolate" is applied by the Lord Jesus to the events of the very last days; it is this desolation which shall be removed by His literal return to Zion. The phrase is used in Dan. 8:13; 11:31 and 12:11 [see notes there]. In each case, it has discernible fulfilments at the time of Antiochus, when the temple was rededicated to Zeus and pigs sacrificed upon it, and the Romans who placed idolatrous symbols in it; but the context always required that it have a latter day fulfilment, and the earlier fulfilments are never without problems when compared to the text. It's the same here in Dan. 9:27. The outline fulfilments in Antiochus and the Romans don't fit perfectly with the prophetic language, nor do they fit the specific required chronology of the various weeks and days. Any references to the abominations placed in the temple by Antiochus and the Romans in AD70 are at best incipient fulfilments. A Messiah figure could have come then and restored Judah's kingdom, but the final, perfect-fit fulfilment shall be at the Lord's return.
Even to the full end, and the wrath that is determined shall be poured out on the one who makes desolate- This "full end" and total destruction of the desolator never came true of the Romans, and it is the language of the last days. Any applications to Antiochus and Rome are therefore at best incipient fulfilments. The chronology of the 7,62 and 1 weeks didn't work out; but it shall do so, in the last days. This final period of 70 weeks [and they may be literal weeks or some other form of "sevens"] will culminate in "the full end" and the full establishment of God's Kingdom. That was what Daniel longed to see happening and it forms the context of the 70 weeks prophecy. It could have come true at the time of Antiochus and the Romans, but Judah's lack of repentance precluded it. And so it shall come true in the last days.
Daniel 9 speaks of a coming “prince”, an emir or caliph, in Arabic terms, who will lead Israel’s enemies in desecrating the temple area and capturing Jerusalem. This figure had incipient fulfilments in Antiochus Epiphanes and the AD70 Roman desecration of the temple mount. The final conflict with a true Messiah figure and the establishment of God’s Kingdom could have come at these points, but it was delayed, so that these became but shadows of the final fulfilment in the last days.
It is however significant that the Roman desecration of the temple is used by the Lord Jesus in the Olivet prophecy as a prototype of that which shall be done in the last days. The Roman empire began as the republic of the city of Rome; but there were simply not enough literal ‘Romans’ to dominate the large area of the Roman empire. The majority of Roman soldiers were not Romans, but mercenaries or nationals of other areas apart from Rome. What’s interesting is that the legions which destroyed Jerusalem and the temple in AD70 were largely comprised of Arabs, Syrians and other neighbouring nations who bitterly hated the Jews.
Tacitus explains: “Titus Caesar… found in Judaea three legions, the 5th, the 10th, and the 15th… To these he added the 12th from Syria, and some men belonging to the 18th and 3rd, whom he had withdrawn from Alexandria. This force was accompanied… by a strong contingent of Arabs, who hated the Jews with the usual hatred of neighbours…” (Tacitus, The History, New Ed edition Book 5.1. Editor: Moses Hadas, Translators: Alfred Church, William Brodribb (New York: Modern Library, 2003)). This Arab / Syrian destruction of Jerusalem in AD70, albeit under the control of a larger ‘beast’ entity, is a detailed prototype of that which is yet to come. Josephus confirms the record of Tacitus by saying that the Roman troops were gathered in Syria, i.e. the army was gathered together from Syrian recruits: "So Vespasian sent his son Titus [who], came by land into Syria, where he gathered together the Roman forces, with a considerable number of auxiliaries from the kings in that neighborhood" (Flavius Josephus, The Complete Works of Josephus, The Wars of the Jews or The History of the Destruction of Jerusalem, Book III, Chapter 1, Paragraph 3)”. Josephus also mentions that at least 6000 Arabs were sent by just one Arab king: "Malchus also, the king of Arabia, sent a thousand horsemen, besides five thousand footmen, the greatest part of which were archers; so that the whole army, including the auxiliaries sent by the kings, as well horsemen and footmen, when all were united together, amounted to sixty thousand" (Flavius Josephus, The Complete Works of Josephus, The Wars of the Jews or The History of the Destruction of Jerusalem, Book III, Chapter 4, Paragraph 20)”.
This picture of a Syrian / Arab desecration of Jerusalem in AD70 is supported by other discoveries and reports. “Legions based in Cappadocia, Syria, and Egypt were made up of recruits from Asia Minor, Syria, and Egypt”, Nigel Pollard, Soldiers, Cities, and Civilians in Roman Syria (University of Michigan Press, 2000) p.15. Josephus claims that in the siege of Jerusalem, “the whole army, including the auxiliaries sent by the kings, as well horsemen and footmen, when all were united together, amounted to sixty thousand” (Flavius Josephus, The Complete Works of Josephus, The Wars of the Jews or The History of the Destruction of Jerusalem, Book III, Chapter 4, Paragraph 20). A legion contained around 5,000 soldiers and he says there were four full legions and two partial legions involved in the attack- around 25,000 legionaries. This means that the remaining 35,000 were auxiliaries, relatively local men. Josephus confirms this when by noting that the auxiliaries were “sent by the kings” from “the neighbourhood” of Syria, Asia Minor and Arabia. Pollard gives more reason to think of there being many Syrians involved: "Other evidence that Syrian legions of the Flavian period were characteristically 'Syrian' in some way comes from Tacitus’ reference to Legion 3 Gallica saluting the rising sun ‘according to the custom of Syria’ [ita in Syria mos est]… in A.D. 69" (op cit p. 116). Josephus is quite explicit about this: "The greatest part of the Roman garrison was raised out of Syria; and being thus related to the Syrian part, they were ready to assist it" (The Wars of The Jews, History of the Destruction of Jerusalem, by Flavius Josephus. Trans. William Whiston, Book II: Chapter, Para. 7).
What we do know from Daniel 11:31 is that the “vile person” is also called “the king of the north”, and this is a common title for the ruler of Assyria- present day Iran / Iraq / Kurdistan / Syria. And we’ve shown above that Old Testament passages about the ruler of Assyria are the basis for other ‘antichrist’ prophecies of the New Testament. The phrase “vile person” is interesting in itself. If the first usage of a word in Scripture is significant, then Gen. 25:34 is indeed helpful here- because it is used of Esau, father of many of the Arab tribes. And it recurs in describing Edom in Obadiah 2, Goliath the Philistine / Palestinian (1 Sam. 17:42), “Tobiah the Ammonite and Geshem the Arabian” (Neh. 2:19), and Haman the persecutor of the Jews (Esther 3:6). All these men were Arab prototypes of the “vile person”, the ruler of Assyria, who is to again persecute God’s people. Note that “the man of sin” of 2 Thess. 2:8 alludes to “the wicked one” of Is. 11:4 LXX, who is, again, “the Assyrian”! So it would appear very likely that the antichrist figure comes from ‘Assyria’. And what’s going on in Iraq and the territory of ‘Assyria’ right now is gripping the whole world’s attention. Note how the Assyrian is described in Is. 30:31-33 as being thrown into a lake of fire- just as the future beast will be (Rev. 19:20).
A Jewish-Moslem Antichrist Covenant?
The “prince that shall come”, who finally stands in opposition to “Messiah the Prince”, will “confirm the covenant with many for one week”, during which he places the abomination of desolation (Dan. 9:27). The same language is used here as about the “little horn” of Daniel 7 and 8. This individual is characterized in Dan. 8:24,25 as being politically crafty: “He shall destroy wonderfully, and shall prosper, and
practice, and shall destroy the mighty and the holy people. And through his policy also he shall cause craft to prosper in his hand; and he shall magnify himself in his heart, and by peace shall destroy many: he shall also stand up against the Prince of princes; but he shall be broken without hand”. Note that amad translated “stand up against” is a word also found in Arabic, and is one of the names of the prophet Mohammad (Sura 61:6). The latter day caliph or “prince of the [Moslem] faithful” will (like all good Moslems) be the emulation of Mohammad. I have explained in commenting on Revelation chapters 6 and 7 that radical Islam has a special theological interest in forcing Jewish people to convert to Islam. And they will feel justified in brutally punishing those who resist- all as predicted in those chapters of Revelation. The idea of Antichrist making a covenant with the Jews is in fact required by the Koran in Sura 3.64: “Say: O People of the Scripture! Come to an agreement between us and you: that we shall worship none but Allah”. It would seem that a covenant is made whereby the Jews accept Islam in return for mercy; but then this covenant is broken and the Jews are butchered. Such agreements featured in Israel’s Old Testament history. Sura 4.154,155 and commentary upon it justifies the fiercest punishment of the Jews by Moslems because "We took from them a firm covenant. But because of their breaking of their covenant…". We can imagine how things will develop: The downtrodden people of Israel will enter a covenant with the
radical Muslims or jihadist Islamic Beast / State, then they will be accused of breaking it, and this will justify the Moslems in embarking upon a policy of totally destroying them, believing they are being obedient to the Koran by doing so. Sura 5.14,15 likewise: “And because of their [O children of Israel] breaking their covenant, we have cursed them and made hard their hearts. They change words from their context [in distorting the Torah to contradict the Koran] and forget a part of that whereof they were admonished… Therefore we have stirred up enmity and hatred among them till the Day of Resurrection”. This “enmity and hatred” is the kind of hatred against God’s people in the land that is described in the prophecies of the latter day beast, venting “the old hatred” (Ez. 25:15) against Israel.
Previous Chapter
